nanog mailing list archives
Re: RIPE our of IPv4
From: Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2019 12:37:17 -0800
On Dec 1, 2019, at 18:05 , Brandon Martin <lists.nanog () monmotha net> wrote: On 12/1/19 8:56 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:End Users End users receive IP addresses for use in their internal networks only, and not for distribution to external users of their Internet services.I guess it's possible that these networks would be considered end users, but I get the impression that they would probably be classified as ISPs, and then the fee would indeed be $500/yr for 2X-Small. A bit ridiculous for IPv6-only, but still probably approaching noise in the budget for a service provider who has a legacy allocation unless they have remained tiny somehow (in which case, sell off some of that IP space you have and pay your $500/yr for the next decade or so). FWIW, if you need it, you should also be immediately eligible for a /24 for IPv6 deployment and transition tech at no additional cost since your legacy space wouldn't be considered by ARIN unless you specifically brought it under their purview AFAIK. Even if you don't need the space, per se, there are often times where it's useful to have a disjoint /24 e.g. for traffic engineering, anycast, DNS servers, etc. All depends on how much legacy space you have, I guess. I'm also somewhat hopeful that, as those allocations all come from a known block, the various content networks will recognize them as being likely to house the inevitable (eventually) CGN sources, but I won't hold my breath.
I would like to clarify that the idea of Legacy “Space” i somewhat fallacious. In reality there are only legacy registrations. Once the registration is brought under an RSA (or LRSA) either by the original holder, or through the transfer process, the resulting registration loses its “Legacy” status. In the case of LRSA, there are some additional rights afforded to the original holder, but in the event of a subsequent transfer, that space would move to a standard RSA. ARIN will consider all space held by an organization, whether legacy or otherwise in computing need. However, to the best of my knowledge, need under a section 4.10 request is computed independent of other IPv4 holdings. As such, I believe that the first /24 issued to an organization under section 4.10 would not consider their existing IPv4 holdings. Subsequent 4.10 requests are evaluated based on the utilization of the previous 4.10 space for its intended purpose.
I guess you also get to vote in ARIN elections and comment on policy matters as a member, if that matters to you.
Membership is not required to comment on policy matters. Anyone with an email address may comment on policy matters simply by subscribing to and participating in the ARIN public policy mailing list. Membership is required to vote in ARIN elections for the Advisory Council and the Board of Trustees. Owen
Current thread:
- Re: RIPE our of IPv4 Simon Leinen (Dec 01)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: RIPE our of IPv4 Mark Tinka (Dec 01)
- Re: RIPE our of IPv4 Mark Tinka (Dec 01)
- Re: RIPE our of IPv4 Owen DeLong (Dec 01)
- Re: RIPE our of IPv4 Matthew Kaufman (Dec 01)
- Re: RIPE our of IPv4 Mark Andrews (Dec 01)
- Re: RIPE our of IPv4 Brandon Martin (Dec 01)
- Re: RIPE our of IPv4 Owen DeLong (Dec 02)
- Re: RIPE our of IPv4 Matthew Kaufman (Dec 01)
- Re: RIPE our of IPv4 Owen DeLong (Dec 02)
- US Broadband IPv6 (Re: RIPE out of IPv4) Jared Mauch (Dec 02)
- Re: RIPE our of IPv4 Mark Andrews (Dec 02)
- Re: RIPE our of IPv4 Randy Bush (Dec 03)
- Re: RIPE our of IPv4 Aled Morris via NANOG (Dec 04)
- Re: RIPE our of IPv4 Large Hadron Collider (Dec 05)